Quadratic Voting is a decision-making process that not only reveals which option receives the most votes, but also how strongly people support or oppose a particular decision.
For cooperatives, networks, and community-based organizations, this method can be interesting when decisions are not to be made by simple majority alone.
In a classic vote, each person usually has one vote. This makes it visible which position has the numerical majority.
What often remains invisible:
Quadratic Voting attempts to make this intensity visible.
Each person receives a certain number of voting credits. These can be distributed among different options. Those who want to give more weight to an option can cast multiple votes. However, the cost of additional votes increases quadratically.
This means:
| Votes for an option | Cost in voting credits |
|---|---|
| 1 vote | 1 point |
| 2 votes | 4 points |
| 3 votes | 9 points |
| 4 votes | 16 points |
| 5 votes | 25 points |
This prevents a person from concentrating an arbitrary number of votes on a single topic. At the same time, it creates space to make particularly important concerns more visible.
In a cooperative, it is not just about organizing majorities. It is also about weighing responsibility, impact, and feasibility together.
Quadratic Voting can help when multiple topics need to be evaluated simultaneously, for example:
The method is particularly suitable for prioritizations and opinion polls. It does not automatically replace legally binding votes according to cooperative law or bylaws.
A simple majority primarily answers the question:
Which option gets the most votes?
Quadratic Voting adds a second layer to this question:
How strong is the support or opposition?
This allows decisions to be prepared in a more nuanced way. An option that is slightly preferred by many can be weighted differently than a concern that is only supported by a few, but is very important to them.
A cooperative wants to decide which three topics should be prioritized in the coming year:
Each member receives, for example, 25 voting credits.
A member could allocate these points as follows:
This makes not only visible what is chosen, but also which topics are particularly important to individual members.
Quadratic Voting can have several advantages in community structures:
This can be particularly helpful in cooperatives because not only capital, but also relationships, responsibility, and shared future viability matter there.
Quadratic Voting is not a cure-all.
It requires clear rules, good explanation, and a protected framework. It is particularly important that voting is not done with real money, but with equally distributed voting credits. Otherwise, financially stronger individuals could exert more influence than others.
For cooperative contexts, it is therefore crucial:
For TEIKEI, Quadratic Voting could be particularly helpful where many important topics are on the table simultaneously and a simple yes-no vote provides too little orientation.
Possible areas of application would be:
However, Quadratic Voting should not be seen as a replacement for discussion, consent, or careful deliberation. It can be a complementary tool to make sentiment more clearly, fairly, and differentiatedly visible.
Quadratic Voting can help cooperatives design decision-making processes more finely.
It makes visible that not every vote has only one direction, but also a strength. This allows community organizations to better recognize which topics are broadly supported and where individual groups are particularly strongly affected.
For TEIKEI, this method is particularly interesting as a complementary tool: not as a technical solution for all decision-making questions, but as a way to make participation, impact, and shared priorities more consciously visible.
One level up: Decision-Making and Governance at TEIKEI
Author: Felix Schröder, with the help of AI (ChatGPT)
Creation: written by Felix Schröder › formatted in Markdown by ChatGPT › published by Felix Schröder › layout adjusted by Claude
Created: 2026-04-24 · Last updated: 2026-04-24 · Questions or feedback? support@teikei.us